2320 Comments and Question

[sebsmith]

Okay, since a friend wants to start a 2320 game (which can be found here) I've been looking at the ship creation rules found here. My first comment is that the size of a ships's drive seems to have much more to do with the ship's speed then the size of the ship. I worked out a combination of the equations given on page 6 of starship design pdf of:

Size = (.7*We*cube root(20D(TMb)))/(TMa)

where size is the size of the drive, We is the speed in ly/days, D is the volume of the ship in dtons, TMa is the modifier from the first equation (14, 19, 24, ...), and TMb is the modifier from the second equation (.5, 1, 1.5, ...). This seems like it would support a large ship universe, since drive size increases at the cube root of the ships's size, what counterbalances this?

Also, does anybody know what the standards of the various human powers are? By which I mean, how do the stats of the various powers' vessels (French, British, German, Manchurian, American, Australian, ...) compare to the one American light cruiser in the book?

Also, is this the right place to put this? I wasn't sure if it belonged here, in the In My 2320 Universe section, or even in the The Fleet section. If this is the wrong place, don't hesitate to move it.

 

[Colin]

While the equations support large ships, the universe doesn't. it's a "flavour" thing. And since ships need far less fuel than their Traveller counterparts, it balances out to a degree. So there is nothing mechanical to balance things out. Power plant size might balance things out, as the largest fusion plant available is 600 EP (I think, it's been awhile).

The American cruiser listed is one of the fastest ships in human space. It's faster than most missiles, and almost all fighters. It is definitely faster than any other warship. Most warships might be half of its speed, or less.

This is as good a place as any for 2320AD questions.

 

[sebsmith]

While the equations support large ships, the universe doesn't. it's a "flavour" thing. And since ships need far less fuel than their Traveller counterparts, it balances out to a degree. So there is nothing mechanical to balance things out. Power plant size might balance things out, as the largest fusion plant available is 600 EP (I think, it's been awhile).

I guess that works. I'd normally want the mechanics to support the flavor so that if the players get into positions of power they can't revolutionize naval combat by moving things to what the mechanics support. The text says that "fusion reactor can vary from 300 to 1000 EP," but the table has a Min Power of 300 and a Max Power of 800. Also, is there any reason One couldn't just use multiple fusion to provide for EP higher than that?

The American cruiser listed is one of the fastest ships in human space. It's faster than most missiles, and almost all fighters. It is definitely faster than any other warship. Most warships might be half of its speed, or less.

Thanks, that's very helpful for making my own ships, can you tell me anything more about the strategies that the various countries follow?

This is as good a place as any for 2320AD questions.

Woot!

 

[Colin]

National Design Philosophies:
French: Slower, well-armored, specialized vessels, lots of missiles, advanced designs
German: Faster than French, armored, but not as well, multi-purpose hulls
Manchurian: smaller, raider-type vessels. Hit and run tactics
American: Fast, lots of missiles. little armor

As far as mechanics that limit design size, there is really only cost. Also figure design and build time will enter into it. Build time is approximately 1 day per 10 tons for small craft (<100 tons), 1 day per 5 tons to 1000 tons, 1 day per ton over 1000 tons.

You can have multiple power plants.

 

[sebsmith]

Very useful, thanks. By the way, do you know Australia's, Canada's, or Britain's design philosophy?

 

[Colin]

Very useful, thanks. By the way, do you know Australia's, Canada's, or Britain's design philosophy?

I should. I wrote it.

Canada favours long-range, small-ish multipurpose vessels, typically with a combat lander of some sort and/or an orbital cutter. Heavy missile armament, light on guns, average speed

Australia has a design philosophy similar to America's, but less so. Not as fast, not as many missiles, still no armour.

Britain has often used licence-built French designs, some home-grown designs are all over the place. They don't seem to have a consistent design philosophy, but more of a what fits, use. Many specialized vessels.

 

[Colin]

Oh, and the etrangre website (google etrangre 2300) is an amazing resource, even if many of them disagree with me.

 

[dan891]

Oh, and the etrangre website (google etrangre 2300) is an amazing resource, even if many of them disagree with me.

Etranger - as in the Legion or the Camus novel, or just generally 'outsider' http://www.etranger.org.uk/2300/index.htm

Well, disagree occasionally and more in the detail than in the big things.. ;-)

Dan

 

[Colin]

At this point, I disagree with some of the details, too. Time grants a new perspective.

 

[dan891]

There are times I really wonder what I was on about in some of my earlier stuff

 

[epicenter00]

There are times I really wonder what I was on about in some of my earlier stuff

Typically I find my military stuff I write is that I lean towards the grittier and shabbier as time goes on.

So I start with "The Force" (we'll say) some totally fictitious unit in some futuristic version of the UK.

First draft (like 15 years ago): The Force is awesome and gets all the best equipment. In fact, they're so uber they're often testing amazing new technology (that of course usually works spectacularly). Their operations almost always go off without a hitch and they're in and out before the dust even settles. Amazing! and they take the cream of the military and Scots, Irish, Welsh, and English work together perfectly, united by their common military professionalism. Detailed TO&E right down to the names of the squad leaders and the equipment each squad has and so on. This is the draft that's so embarrassing I pretend like I didn't even write it now.

Second draft (about 7 years ago): The Force is pretty good. They're veterans of the line infantry battalions and are considered crack troops. They make do with standard equipment and whatever the men buy or "acquire" on their own. If HQ needs a hard job done, the Force does it. Though they take casualties at times, they always win through. No longer a detailed TO&E; maybe big leaders and some general equipment.

Third draft (the present): The Force is okay. They've taken some bumps and hits over time and a lot of their best men have been taken to lead and stiffen new units raised for the Kafer war. The unit now has a lot of green soldiers, mostly lower-class English in a bad way, who often rub their Scots NCOs and really even their mixed officers corps the wrong way. They're still waiting for their new vehicles to replace the old ones. The men aren't so sure about that; while the old vehicles are outclassed by what the Kafers have, the men are familiar with them, and they've heard horror stories about how the new hover APCs are difficult to keep running and the anti-missile system isn't all that it's supposed to be. Worst of all, the motor pool technicians aren't qualified to work the computer systems and the Indian fellows who are experts on the software speak English with such thick accents, they can't understand them! TO&E is who cares - I don't plan to publish this anyway, I'll just detail out the guys the PCs are likely to deal with which won't involve the CO.